On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 3:22:54 AM UTC-8, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
> Am Sat, 19 Feb 2022 19:34:51 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net>:
> >On 2/19/2022 4:14 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> >>>>>> I've been involved in bike car accidents with and without helmets.
> >>>>>> My head came out better wearing the helmet than not wearing the
> >>>>>> helmet. Enough proof for me to keep wearing a helmet and recommend a helmet to others too.
> This is not proof, but a conclusion from an unsupported assumption.
> There is valid reasoning, that wearing an oversized brake pad around
> your might hit your head to the road, creating a dangerous rotation,
> when there wouldn't happen anything without such headgear.
> >>>>> That is a problem with using personal experiences to justify something
> >>>>> or another.
> Exactly. So how do we know it is safe not to wear a helmet while
> walking stairs or just walking around? (But see below).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have had two bicycle crashes of sufficient severity to break bones,
> >>>>> once my pelvis and once my ribs... and in neither case was there even
> >>>>> a mark on my helmet. No indication that my head had hit the pavement
> >>>>> at all.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Proof that a helmet does no good at all (:-)
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> John B.
> >>>>
> >>>> Your personal experience should have justified to you to wear body armor when riding a bike. After the first torso bones were broken, I would have thought you would learn to protect that part of the body. Make a mistake once, and its a learning experience. Make the same mistake a second time, and it proves you did not learn
> anything. I broke my head open in the first accident. After that I learned to use a helmet when riding a bike.
> >>> Hmm. I've learned not to crash. Much more effective!
> >>>
> >>> Of course, I learned that back when I was in my teens.
> >>>
> >>> Fun fact: It's been documented that helmeted riders crash quite a bit
> >>> more often than people riding without helmets. I'm sure I can dig up the
> >>> links if people need them. But as one example, in the most notorious bit
> >>> of pro-helmet propaganda (Thompson & Rivara, 1989 or so), the percentage
> >>> of ER kids in helmets was nearly seven times the percentage of kids
> >>> city-wide in helmets.
> >>
> >> Frank, you have very limited control over crashing a bike. You cannot learn to prevent a car from hitting you as occurred to me a couple of years ago. While crossing an intersection the car next to a woman started turning right and the driver of the car in the lane I was crossing took that to mean the way was clear and
> accelerated into me. You cannot "learn to not crash".
> >
> >Gosh, I guess I've just been really, really lucky.
> I haven't been so lucky, broke my collar bone (comminuted fracture) plus
> six ribs, more than ten years ago, while riding home from work, getting
> some additional damage along the way.
>
> Contrary to popular, unfounded opinions about how and when such crashes
> occur, circumstances where: on a street mostly used by cars, most of the
> time (but not at that time, no traffic in sight), on a calm, sunny day
> in summer, at slow speed (my Garmin told me ~12 km/h == 7.5 mph), no
> mistake on my side.
>
> But ... neither did I wear a bicycle helmet, nor did my head touch the
> ground when when my front wheel tire suddenly deflated while I was
> banking through a narrow roundabout and fell as a result. My goatee
> touched the ground and I had severe bruises on the left side of my body
> in addition to the fractures.
>
> I haven't worn a bicycle helmet in the whole of my life, not because auf
> anecdotes like this, but because I studied the literature and analyzed
> the available statistics.
>
> Wrt. risks - I'm still at loss why people who already own a bicycle
> helmet don't wear it while climbing stairs, use a stepladder or drive
> their car. Severe head injuries happen, that's for sure, but even deadly
> head injuries during harmless everyday activities outnumber such
> injuries from bicycle crashes by a great margin.
>
> When I looked up the number of deaths by head injury in Germany a few
> years ago, there where more than twice as much deaths from people
> falling out or stumbling over their beds, than from happening to
> cyclists in traffic accidents. For months, we had more COVID-19-deaths
> per day (!) than cyclist deaths in a year. Contrary to myth, cycling
> on roads isn't especially dangerous, actually it is quite safe. Knowing
> the rules, proper behaviour, a working front brake and some strengh can
> make it even safer.
> >
> >Just at random!
> >
> >Year in and year out, for well over 50 years.
> >
> >What are the odds?
> >
> >(Two moving on-road falls as an adult cyclist. One when the forks
> >suddenly snapped off our custom tandem. The other descending a 20% grade
> >gravelly street in winter at walking speed.)
> Riding to work all year round for over 20 years, dense traffic under
> difficult conditions, gave me a rule of thumb: expect one serious fall
> per year. I got a partial fracture in my foot during a crash on a
> bicylce mandatory cycle path in 1994, when a young unemployed
> electricican apprentice hit me with his mothers car, when he took my
> right of way. One more reason to avoid "bicyling infrastructure" like
> the proverbial plague.
>
> "Who could have expected traffic coming from that direction?" he wrote,
> in the accident report to the police.
>
> Besides that, I only got abrasions and a laceration that required a few
> stitche. Most of the time, a fall didn't have any consequences
> whatsoever, not even damaged clothes.
> --
> Wir danken für die Beachtung aller Sicherheitsbestimmungen

Wolfgang, you had a case of misattribution there. I did not say that I had been in multiple car/bike accidents and I have been extremely scientific about the usefulness or not of helmets. I have made serious studies about both bicycle helmets and why motorcycle helmets, which have virtually the same construction, work so much better for motorcycle racers. I was the safety director of what at the time was a major governing body of motorcycle racing. Anything I say about helmets is entirely based in statistical evidence.

Will a helmet save your life? That is highly unlikely. But it can certainly improve your chances of serious injury in the most common accidents that bicyclists have - relatively minor accidents that don't involve motor vehicles.

with <fqu21hdma63jo8fc1rsslko6tjnh5vcjvb@4ax.com> John B wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 13:53:33 +0000, Eric Pozharski
><whynot@pozharski.name> wrote:
>>with <1n901hh4gr0h99h3ifjfp4glk3t94v3hbj@4ax.com> John B wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 13:26:54 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>On 2/18/2022 11:37 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

>>*SKIP*
>>>>> King County (i.e. Seattle area, where a lot of this started) just
>>>>> repealed its Mandatory Helmet Law.
>>*SKIP*
>>>> Oh, forgot my favorite. Trains cause crossing crashes!
>>*SKIP*
>>> I would rather comment that the deaths, to a great extent
>>> demonstrate a level of stupidity that is amazing. Here comes the
>>> train, 70 MPH and the gates are down, red lights flashing and
>>> someone, apparently drives out in front of the train.
>>>
>>> Why not consider it as "selective breeding", getting rid of the more
>>> stupid sector of humanity (:-)
>>
>> That's too easy. Add The Lizard People and elections to the mix and
>> you got yourself a conspiracy.
>
> What would one call it? The conspiracy of the Elders of the Lizard
> Peoples? Or maybe the conspiracy of the stupid?
> The latter seems quite appropriate (:-)

Good thinking here! What if, in train-vs-anything conflict, The Lizard
People aren't on the train side?

--
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

On 2/20/2022 12:58 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 4:34:56 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 2/19/2022 4:14 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>
>>> Frank, you have very limited control over crashing a bike. You cannot learn to prevent a car from hitting you as occurred to me a couple of years ago. While crossing an intersection the car next to a woman started turning right and the driver of the car in the lane I was crossing took that to mean the way was clear and accelerated into me. You cannot "learn to not crash".
>> Gosh, I guess I've just been really, really lucky.
>>
>> Just at random!
>>
>> Year in and year out, for well over 50 years.
>>
>> What are the odds?
>>
>> (Two moving on-road falls as an adult cyclist. One when the forks
>> suddenly snapped off our custom tandem. The other descending a 20% grade
>> gravelly street in winter at walking speed.)
>
> Frank, perhaps you don't remember arguing with me ...

Tom, you must learn to be skeptical of your "memory."

> ... that the automobile was FAR safer than riding a bicycle when I presented the numbers of bicycle accidents each year? Rather than hours of riding you wanted to measure it in miles covered.

I've discussed bike safety issues in terms of miles, hours and trips.
Each is valid for different points of discussion. (I know that's a lot
for you to remember.)

This is the idealic world of Frank Kragowski - argue about absolutely
anything because that is all you have to show for your life.

"Argue about absolutely anything because that is all you have to show
for your life." Such unintentional irony! :-)

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:15:37 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/20/2022 12:58 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 4:34:56 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> On 2/19/2022 4:14 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Frank, you have very limited control over crashing a bike. You cannot learn to prevent a car from hitting you as occurred to me a couple of years ago. While crossing an intersection the car next to a woman started turning right and the driver of the car in the lane I was crossing took that to mean the way was clear and accelerated into me. You cannot "learn to not crash".
> >> Gosh, I guess I've just been really, really lucky.
> >>
> >> Just at random!
> >>
> >> Year in and year out, for well over 50 years.
> >>
> >> What are the odds?
> >>
> >> (Two moving on-road falls as an adult cyclist. One when the forks
> >> suddenly snapped off our custom tandem. The other descending a 20% grade
> >> gravelly street in winter at walking speed.)
> >
> > Frank, perhaps you don't remember arguing with me ...
>
> Tom, you must learn to be skeptical of your "memory."
>
> > ... that the automobile was FAR safer than riding a bicycle when I presented the numbers of bicycle accidents each year? Rather than hours of riding you wanted to measure it in miles covered.
>
> I've discussed bike safety issues in terms of miles, hours and trips.
> Each is valid for different points of discussion. (I know that's a lot
> for you to remember.)
> This is the idealic world of Frank Kragowski - argue about absolutely
> anything because that is all you have to show for your life.
> "Argue about absolutely anything because that is all you have to show
> for your life." Such unintentional irony! :-)

Now you want to lie about it to suit your purposes. I remember your stupid argument that rather than use actual time on the bike we should use distance traveled meaning that made the automobile much safer than the bicycle. Take your bullshit elsewhere where Russell and Flunky will take your useless word for it.

On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 10:18:13 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:15:37 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 2/20/2022 12:58 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 4:34:56 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >> On 2/19/2022 4:14 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Frank, you have very limited control over crashing a bike. You cannot learn to prevent a car from hitting you as occurred to me a couple of years ago. While crossing an intersection the car next to a woman started turning right and the driver of the car in the lane I was crossing took that to mean the way was clear and accelerated into me. You cannot "learn to not crash".
> > >> Gosh, I guess I've just been really, really lucky.
> > >>
> > >> Just at random!
> > >>
> > >> Year in and year out, for well over 50 years.
> > >>
> > >> What are the odds?
> > >>
> > >> (Two moving on-road falls as an adult cyclist. One when the forks
> > >> suddenly snapped off our custom tandem. The other descending a 20% grade
> > >> gravelly street in winter at walking speed.)
> > >
> > > Frank, perhaps you don't remember arguing with me ...
> >
> > Tom, you must learn to be skeptical of your "memory."
> >
> > > ... that the automobile was FAR safer than riding a bicycle when I presented the numbers of bicycle accidents each year? Rather than hours of riding you wanted to measure it in miles covered.
> >
> > I've discussed bike safety issues in terms of miles, hours and trips.
> > Each is valid for different points of discussion. (I know that's a lot
> > for you to remember.)
> > This is the idealic world of Frank Kragowski - argue about absolutely
> > anything because that is all you have to show for your life.
> > "Argue about absolutely anything because that is all you have to show
> > for your life." Such unintentional irony! :-)
> Now you want to lie about it to suit your purposes. I remember your stupid argument that rather than use actual time on the bike we should use distance traveled meaning that made the automobile much safer than the bicycle. Take your bullshit elsewhere where Russell and Flunky will take your useless word for it.

In certain situations it makes sense to use time on the vehicle (bike or car). And in other situations it makes sense to use distance traveled. When comparing safety. Its very similar to comparing bullet calibers in wars. Big heavy bullet. Small lightweight bullet. More rounds carried and fired with one over the other. More deaths with one than the other. More injuries maybe with the other. Which is more accurate? Does accuracy make a difference in injury or death? Does it matter if a person is injured or dead? Deaths or injuries per round fired. Cost of bullets.
Many ways to measure the same thing.

On 2/21/2022 11:18 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:15:37 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>> Tom, you must learn to be skeptical of your "memory."
>>
>>> ... that the automobile was FAR safer than riding a bicycle when I presented the numbers of bicycle accidents each year? Rather than hours of riding you wanted to measure it in miles covered.
>>
>> I've discussed bike safety issues in terms of miles, hours and trips.
>> Each is valid for different points of discussion. (I know that's a lot
>> for you to remember.)
>> This is the idealic world of Frank Kragowski - argue about absolutely
>> anything because that is all you have to show for your life.
>> "Argue about absolutely anything because that is all you have to show
>> for your life." Such unintentional irony! :-)
>
> Now you want to lie about it to suit your purposes. I remember your stupid argument...

Please, Tom, put quotes around the word "remember" each time you use it.
You've proven countless times that your "memory" is mostly imaginary.

Your "memory" of what I actually said on this point is as tangled as
your logic. As usual, you're arguing against what you _wish_ I said, not
what I actually said.

Feel free to prove me wrong by a link to a relevant post of mine.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 4:59:02 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/21/2022 11:18 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 6:15:37 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>
> >> Tom, you must learn to be skeptical of your "memory."
> >>
> >>> ... that the automobile was FAR safer than riding a bicycle when I presented the numbers of bicycle accidents each year? Rather than hours of riding you wanted to measure it in miles covered.
> >>
> >> I've discussed bike safety issues in terms of miles, hours and trips.
> >> Each is valid for different points of discussion. (I know that's a lot
> >> for you to remember.)
> >> This is the idealic world of Frank Kragowski - argue about absolutely
> >> anything because that is all you have to show for your life.
> >> "Argue about absolutely anything because that is all you have to show
> >> for your life." Such unintentional irony! :-)
> >
> > Now you want to lie about it to suit your purposes. I remember your stupid argument...
>
> Please, Tom, put quotes around the word "remember" each time you use it.
> You've proven countless times that your "memory" is mostly imaginary.
>
> Your "memory" of what I actually said on this point is as tangled as
> your logic. As usual, you're arguing against what you _wish_ I said, not
> what I actually said.
>
> Feel free to prove me wrong by a link to a relevant post of mine.

Why Frank? Does it hurt you to be reminded of your stupidity?